General David Petraeus, the most celebrated American soldier of his generation, is to leave his post as commander of US and Nato forces in Afghanistan. The Times can reveal that the Pentagon aims to replace General Petraeus, who was appointed less than eight months ago, by the end of the year

I doubt he’s running for office. K@t!e C0ur!c interviewed Petraeus’ wife last week on her failing evening newscast. I thought that was just strange. Not that I don’t want to know what the wife of Petraeus thinks, but it was just weird.

Petraeus is registered to vote as a Republican in New Hampshirehe once described himself to a friend as a northeastern Republican, in the tradition of Nelson Rockefellerbut he said that around 2002, after he became a two-star general, he stopped voting.

There really hasn’t been any significant reporting from Afghanistan, as far as I can see. Every once in a while a report of troops being killed by an IED or the like, but no sense of what is happening there, if anything.

I really get the feeling that this has turned into a meaningless war, where our troops are getting killed for nothing, and where the ROEs don’t really even permit them to defend themselves.

About all I can tell from the reports is that the body count keeps going up, and we don’t really seem to be winning anything or getting anywhere. McCrystal and Petraeus are both very capable leaders for this kind of war, but I think their hands have been tied.

His tenure in Afghanistan had to be for a limited time, because he has already had his turn at the helm, and then some. Let’s keep in mind that he took a demotion to replace Stanley McCrystal, and I’m certain General Petraeus is looking forward to spending some time with the grandkids.

“Petraeus, more than anyone else, has been identified with the intensified military campaign in Afghanistan which, according to critics of the policy, has reduced prospects of a political settlement by alienating Taliban leaders who might otherwise be coaxed into peace talks.

His departure, especially with Gates on his way out, could create the space for Obama to recalibrate Afghan strategy, backing away from the military surge and focusing more on a political settlement - if he wants to do so.”

There is NO POSSIBLE WAY that I would vote for a man that let LTC Lakin and Major Cook swing slowly in the wind.

There is NO POSSIBLE WAY that I would vote for a man that allowed his troops to serve under a likely usurper posing as president and Commander in Chief.

While General Patraeus might be willing to fall on a grenade for his troops against a foreign enemy on foreign soil, I **seriously** doubt that he would defend the Constitution against a **domestic** enemy. Gee! doing that might hurt his career or pension. /s

Ugh... If this is true, then the situation in Afghanistan could be grim. Petraeus was brilliant in Iraq as a counter-insurgency leader. I have difficulty thinking of anyone who would do a better job. I have even less confidence in Obama in picking a replacement.

My brother is a Colonel who he hadn’t voted in years. He said he was apolitical and answered to whomever was CIC. He did vote for McCain, but he said he didn’t think it would make much difference if Obama got elected. He was wrong and now he’s unhappy with Obama so he’s retiring. DADT did it.
BTW, he was on Petraeus’ staff.

29
posted on 02/15/2011 3:41:51 PM PST
by kalee
(The offences we give, we write in the dust; Those we take, we engrave in marble. J Huett 1658)

We’re forgetting what Bob Woodward wrote in his book. He said that Obama wasn’t going to risk losing his base of left wing loons — I’m paraphrasing, I’m sure — over Afghanistan. Petreaus is a good military man, waging a war he’s not ALLOWED to win, seeing good men being killed and injured for no good reason, and he probably said, “F-— it, I’m not going to be a part of this anymore!”

I’d bet on it. No way he leaves a war un-won after only eight months in charge. That’s not his history; that’s not his style. This is an anti-Obama move if there ever was one.

The Washington Post had the scoop on Petraeus earlier today, but buried it:

But virtually the entire U.S. civilian and military leadership in Afghanistan is expected to leave in the coming months, including Ambassador Karl Eikenberry and the embassy's other four most senior officials, Gen. David H. Petraeus, commander of the U.S.-led international coalition, and Lt. Gen. David Rodriguez, who runs day-to-day military operations there.

SNIP

No final decisions have been made, but military officials said that Petraeus, who took command last July, will rotate out of Afghanistan before the end of the year.

I don’t think that warning us that your posts are peppered with a dose of hyperbole ameliorates your use of the word “traitor” to describe General Petraeus. Surely there are less offensive ways for you to express your disappointment with him.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.